The dangers of cutting social programs

Exchanging PMs with Mr. Dilloduck reminded me of a speech given by an aquaintance of my cousin Dahlia at the end of 2004. In one of the many minority-dominated enclaves of Los Angeles, state and county officials were holding a town meeting to decide what to do with a parcel of land that once contained a park. Like many inner city parks, there had been no maintenance or improvements for countless years. Rather than invest money for improvements, the government wanted to sell the land to developers. So, instead of benefitting the neighborhood kids, it would produce profits for the developers and revenue for the city.

To oppose the idea, a short speech was given. Which might apply to inner city projects that are being cut throughout the nation. Here is the basic gist.

"Let's examine the two options you have here.
One, you can invest money in rebuilding and revitalizing the park area. Poor children with little else to do will have a place to play and activities to hold their interests. They won't have to play in the street, get into bored fights with each other, or go looking for other trouble.
Two, you can sell the land. Along with the other parks and activity centers you have closed in the last decade. Kids will have no place to go and nothing constructive to do. They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids. They will notice the nice houses and schools you have, along with the nice parks and activity centers you have, but that you took away from them. This is going to make them angry. They are going to break into your house and take all your belongings. Perhaps they'll beat you up and rape your daughters. Sure, you might have a gun or two. You might kill one or two of them. But the others will kill you and the rest of your family, then set your house of fire. When they are finished, they will return to their neighborhood and get high on crack. Because there is nothing else to do.
The choice is yours."

Exchanging PMs with Mr. Dilloduck reminded me of a speech given by an aquaintance of my cousin Dahlia at the end of 2004. In one of the many minority-dominated enclaves of Los Angeles, state and county officials were holding a town meeting to decide what to do with a parcel of land that once contained a park. Like many inner city parks, there had been no maintenance or improvements for countless years. Rather than invest money for improvements, the government wanted to sell the land to developers. So, instead of benefitting the neighborhood kids, it would produce profits for the developers and revenue for the city.

To oppose the idea, a short speech was given. Which my apply to inner city projects that are being cut throughout the nation. Here is the basic gist.

"Let's examine the two options you have here.
One, you can invest money in rebuilding and revitalizing the park area. Poor children with little else to do will have a place to play and activities to hold their interests. They won't have to play in the street, get into bored fights with each other, or go looking for other trouble.
Two, you can sell the land. Along with the other parks and activity centers you have close in the last decade. Kids will have no place to go and nothing constructive to do. They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids. They will notice the nice houses and schools you have, along with the nice parks and activity centers that you took away from them. This is going to make them angry. They are going to break into your house and take all your belongings. Perhaps they'll beat you up and rape your daughters. Sure, you might have a gun or two. You might kill one or two of them. But the others will kill you and the rest of your family, then set your house of fire. when they are finished, they will return to their neighborhood and get high on crack. Because there is nothing else to do.
The choice is yours."

They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids.

Click to expand...

That's what they do IN parks nowadays. Park's aren't going to cut it. Better parenting is a great place to start in an awful lot of cases.. Then, let's get MORE teachers that give a crap about the kids they're supposed to be teaching.

Exchanging PMs with Mr. Dilloduck reminded me of a speech given by an aquaintance of my cousin Dahlia at the end of 2004. In one of the many minority-dominated enclaves of Los Angeles, state and county officials were holding a town meeting to decide what to do with a parcel of land that once contained a park. Like many inner city parks, there had been no maintenance or improvements for countless years. Rather than invest money for improvements, the government wanted to sell the land to developers. So, instead of benefitting the neighborhood kids, it would produce profits for the developers and revenue for the city.

To oppose the idea, a short speech was given. Which might apply to inner city projects that are being cut throughout the nation. Here is the basic gist.

"Let's examine the two options you have here.
One, you can invest money in rebuilding and revitalizing the park area. Poor children with little else to do will have a place to play and activities to hold their interests. They won't have to play in the street, get into bored fights with each other, or go looking for other trouble.
Two, you can sell the land. Along with the other parks and activity centers you have closed in the last decade. Kids will have no place to go and nothing constructive to do. They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids. They will notice the nice houses and schools you have, along with the nice parks and activity centers you have, but that you took away from them. This is going to make them angry. They are going to break into your house and take all your belongings. Perhaps they'll beat you up and rape your daughters. Sure, you might have a gun or two. You might kill one or two of them. But the others will kill you and the rest of your family, then set your house of fire. When they are finished, they will return to their neighborhood and get high on crack. Because there is nothing else to do.
The choice is yours."

Click to expand...

Ok, so if they build beautiful parks, swimming pools, and nice schools, that will end violent crime? Is that your position or rather the person that gave this 'short speech?'

Exchanging PMs with Mr. Dilloduck reminded me of a speech given by an aquaintance of my cousin Dahlia at the end of 2004. In one of the many minority-dominated enclaves of Los Angeles, state and county officials were holding a town meeting to decide what to do with a parcel of land that once contained a park. Like many inner city parks, there had been no maintenance or improvements for countless years. Rather than invest money for improvements, the government wanted to sell the land to developers. So, instead of benefitting the neighborhood kids, it would produce profits for the developers and revenue for the city.

To oppose the idea, a short speech was given. Which might apply to inner city projects that are being cut throughout the nation. Here is the basic gist.

"Let's examine the two options you have here.
One, you can invest money in rebuilding and revitalizing the park area. Poor children with little else to do will have a place to play and activities to hold their interests. They won't have to play in the street, get into bored fights with each other, or go looking for other trouble.
Two, you can sell the land. Along with the other parks and activity centers you have closed in the last decade. Kids will have no place to go and nothing constructive to do. They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids. They will notice the nice houses and schools you have, along with the nice parks and activity centers you have, but that you took away from them. This is going to make them angry. They are going to break into your house and take all your belongings. Perhaps they'll beat you up and rape your daughters. Sure, you might have a gun or two. You might kill one or two of them. But the others will kill you and the rest of your family, then set your house of fire. When they are finished, they will return to their neighborhood and get high on crack. Because there is nothing else to do.
The choice is yours."

Click to expand...

Did anyone canvas local business for cash? Is there any kind of yearly event(s) to pay for or contribute to up-keep? Is there any type of community association which would promote the above suggestions and/or come up with others?

Anyway, that's what we do around here. If we waited for the government to do EVERYTHING, nothing would get done. Ever.

Exchanging PMs with Mr. Dilloduck reminded me of a speech given by an aquaintance of my cousin Dahlia at the end of 2004. In one of the many minority-dominated enclaves of Los Angeles, state and county officials were holding a town meeting to decide what to do with a parcel of land that once contained a park. Like many inner city parks, there had been no maintenance or improvements for countless years. Rather than invest money for improvements, the government wanted to sell the land to developers. So, instead of benefitting the neighborhood kids, it would produce profits for the developers and revenue for the city.

To oppose the idea, a short speech was given. Which might apply to inner city projects that are being cut throughout the nation. Here is the basic gist.

"Let's examine the two options you have here.
One, you can invest money in rebuilding and revitalizing the park area. Poor children with little else to do will have a place to play and activities to hold their interests. They won't have to play in the street, get into bored fights with each other, or go looking for other trouble.
Two, you can sell the land. Along with the other parks and activity centers you have closed in the last decade. Kids will have no place to go and nothing constructive to do. They will get bored and angry. They will join gangs, produce or buy drugs, and come to your neighborhood to sell the drugs to your kids. They will notice the nice houses and schools you have, along with the nice parks and activity centers you have, but that you took away from them. This is going to make them angry. They are going to break into your house and take all your belongings. Perhaps they'll beat you up and rape your daughters. Sure, you might have a gun or two. You might kill one or two of them. But the others will kill you and the rest of your family, then set your house of fire. When they are finished, they will return to their neighborhood and get high on crack. Because there is nothing else to do.
The choice is yours."

Click to expand...

Let's don't forget option 3.

Require parents to do their job. Require parents to instil a sense of responsibility in their child. Require parents to be parents.

If parents teach their children to respect people, property, and most importantly, themselves, a lot of the things that parks will give the children will take care of themselves. If parents teach their children these things, then gangs, trouble, etc....won't happen.

Put the responsibility back where it belongs - the parents. Instead, this speech is blaming society, government and big business.

Require parents to do their job. Require parents to instil a sense of responsibility in their child. Require parents to be parents.

If parents teach their children to respect people, property, and most importantly, themselves, a lot of the things that parks will give the children will take care of themselves. If parents teach their children these things, then gangs, trouble, etc....won't happen.

Put the responsibility back where it belongs - the parents. Instead, this speech is blaming society, government and big business.

By not giving them crutches like new parks to shove their kids off to so they don't have to watch them. Maybe make it a requirement that kids under a certain age be required to be with their parents while at said parks. The youngest ages are the most impressionable.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!